So as we are all aware, we seem to be playing the 433 at current, I can't help but feel this is wasting the fine talent we have as strikers / forward players. Along with the fact that for me, Lallana looks wasted in the middle with less chance to shine going forward, which is obviously what he is the best at. Rodriguez also looks to be being played out of position, while he does have the necessary pace required to play the lw spot I feel we would get more from him playing as an out and out striker or more central role. So for me the 433 is not what we should play, we have 4 good strikers in Lambert, sharp, Rodriguez and lee but in the current formation only one of them can ever shine properly not least the fact that we are often looking weak defensively in the current setup. So what else could we do? 442 Last year as is widely known we played 442 and it worked, however Adkins has decided this won't cut it for us in the premier league, but why not? Plenty of sides still play 442, if it ain't broke don't change it, being a good formation going forward and when defense is needed. Not to mention being able to play Rodriguez as a striker off Lambert. 442 potential XI: Gk: Kelvin Lb: Fox Cb: Hooiveld Cb: Fonte Rb: Clyne Lm: Lallana Cm: Schneiderlin Cm: Davis Rm: Puncheon St: Lambert St: Rodriguez Potentially the reason we are not still playing this is we lack the quality of rm necessary in the BPL and should we sign Gaston or Phillips (not even gonna open that can of worms) we may go back to it? 41212 Again used by use last year in certain games, in truth it is just a variant of the 442, but changes the way the game is played. Instead of a 2 man attack it is a 3 man with the cam getting forward often and the cdm also helping out the defense when needed. Largely unchanged from the potential 442 XI with Schneiderlin and Davis playing cdm and cam respectively. 4231 The formation seen regularly last year by clubs such as Manchester city to make use of their wealth of attacking options. This is the formation I predicted we would play this year. It allows for plenty of free flowing movement going forward while still keeping us comfortable at the back with the presence of 2 cdm's. 4231 potential XI: Gk: Davis Lb: Fox Cb: Hooiveld Cb: Fonte Rb: Clyne Ldm: Schneiderlin Rdm: Davis Lam: Lallana Cf: Lambert Ram: Lee St: Rodriguez The perfect formation for ping-pong passing which we do so well, great going forward, solid at the back and we get to play Lambert, Lallana, Lee and Rodriguez on the same field with no one out of their comfort zone. Lambert as a cf because for me he is so much more than a target man, how often do we see Ricky sit back in the midfield passing? Yet the cf role still allows him to behave like a striker. Playing Lee Ram also gives him plenty of space to power into and means he can cut in onto his favored left foot. Obviously lee is out injured at current but coming back so in the meantime play Puncheon, also left footed and for me looked really dangerous at city. This would also leave us with a bench including Billy Sharp, Guly, Ward-Prowse and Puncheon when Lee is back, all of which could slot in nicely to freshen up the side. For me this is the formation I would have us playing, I'm not Nigel Adkins and i am not claiming to know better this is just my opinion. I just want to get your thoughts and opinions, what formation would you have us play and why? Or would you stick to the 433 for now?
I'm somebody who thinks that a formation doesn't make a great deal of difference. At the end of the day, players win you matches. In all formations the mentality and ability of individual players makes the difference. e.g. a 442 with offensive full backs is an entirely different tactical proposition to a 442 with defensive full backs. One of the big moves in football now is to not look at formations per se, but about balancing active (attacking), transition and reactive (defensive) players. So a team like Southampton might chose a 5-2-3 split. This could translate into a 442 formation (the two centre backs, two holding midfelders and a deep lying striker, the full backs as transition players and wingers and an all out striker as the offensive ones) or a 433 (two centre backs, three holding midfielders, fullbacks as transitions and the wingers and striker as the offensive players to pull something out quickly). Even a 4231 is a variation on a 442 if used as an offensive formation. What matters is the players you use, the mentality you employ, and the creative freedom given to each player.
I've seen lots of people saying we should play 4231 with Lambert or Guly as the cam, but I think this would quickly change to a 442 with no protection for the full backs as the wingers are pushed so far up the pitch.
Maybe a 4-4-1-1 The key is the movement of the players when we have the ball. I felt at times on Saturday that our movement didn't get behind their defemse at all. Everything was infront of them and so their defence wasn't stretched.
What the OP doesn't quite get is that the team is far more important than it's constituent parts. Taking Lambert out of the equation and anticipating (rightly or wrongly) some new signings, we get something like this: ----------------------Davis------------------- Clyne-----Kana Biyik-----Hooiveld-----Fox --------------Morgan-----Davis-------------- ---------------------Lallana------------------- Ramirez------------------------------Phillips -------------------Rodriguez----------------- Looks pretty tasty if you ask me. 442 is compatible at this level if: A. You use the long ball a lot B. You play with rigid banks of 4 C. You have beasty midfielders who can do 2 jobs at once Saints don't do A or B and don't have C, so on balance, I think the 433 is the best formation to use.
